Madras High Court
M/S.Avian International vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Customs on 21 February, 2025
Author: G.R.Swaminathan
Bench: G.R.Swaminathan
W.P.(MD)No.2 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 21.02.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
W.P(MD)No.2 of 2021
M/s.Avian International,
48, Shreenath Sarthak Industrial Park,
Nr.Torrent Power Sub Station,
Ring Road, Nikol,
Ahmedabad – 382 350.
Through its Partner,
Anurag Borad. ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Assistant Commissioner of Customs,
Custom House,
New Harbour Estate,
Tuticorin – 628 004.
2.The Commissioner of Customs,
Custom House,
New Harbour Estate,
Tuticorin – 628 004.
3.Union of India,
(Notice to be served through
The Minister of Finance),
Parliament Street,
Central Secretariat,
North Block,
New Delhi – 110 001. ... Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/03/2025 04:20:18 pm )
1/4
W.P.(MD)No.2 of 2021
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to refund
Rs.12,72,827/- (IGST) along with interest at 9% calculated from
19.09.2017 (date of shipping bill) till the date of actual payment to the
petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Balasubramanian
For Respondents : Mr.R.Nandakumar for R.1 & R.2
Mr.S.Jeyasingh
Standing Counsel for R.3
JUDGMENT
Heard both sides.
2.The petitioner is an exporter of pharmaceuticals and surgical
goods. He paid a sum of Rs.12,72,827/- towards IGST. The petitioner's
case comes under what is known as Zero Rated Supply. The petitioner
sought refund of the IGST account paid by him by invoking Section
16(3) of IGST Act read with Section 54 of the CGST Act read with Rule
96 of CGST Rules. The petitioner's request was not considered. Hence,
this writ petition has been filed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/03/2025 04:20:18 pm )
3.The issue raised in the writ petition is no longer res integra. The
Hon'ble Division Bench of Gujarat High Court in the decision reported in
2019 (7) TMI 472 (M/s.Amit Cotton Industries Through Partner,
Veljibhai Virjibhai Ranipa Vs Principal Commissioner of Customs) had
categorically held that the aforesaid circular cannot prevail over Rule 96.
The Hon'ble Division Bench observed that the circular will not save the
situation for the Department.
4.In this view of the matter, the first respondent is directed to
refund a sum of Rs.12,72,827/- together with applicable interest to the
petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a
copy of this order.
5.This Writ Petition is allowed accordingly. No costs.
[G.R.S., J.] [M.J.R., J.]
21.02.2025
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
MGA
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/03/2025 04:20:18 pm )
G.R.SWAMINATHAN,J.
AND
M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.
MGA
To
1.The Assistant Commissioner of Customs,
Custom House,
New Harbour Estate,
Tuticorin – 628 004.
2.The Commissioner of Customs,
Custom House,
New Harbour Estate,
Tuticorin – 628 004.
21.02.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/03/2025 04:20:18 pm )
